Month: February 2021

Posted on

Hebrew Literary Features of Moses 1

Book of Moses Essay #44

Moses 1

With contribution by Mark J. Johnson

Download MP3 here

This Essay continues our look at the literary features of Moses 1. Since Moses 1 leads directly into the narrative flow of JST Genesis, it is natural that it should share stylistic and literary features of the Hebrew Bible (our Old Testament). Below, we will highlight three topics: parallelism, Hebraisms, and figures of speech or idioms.

Parallelism

The most important thing to know about Hebrew thought is that it sought beauty and balance in writings by the use of repetition. While Western poetry is largely based on rhyming of sounds, the prose and poetry of the biblical text finds greater value in what one might call the rhyming of ideas. In other words, poetic verse and narrative structure were built on the foundation of repetition. Jack R. Lundbom emphasizes that, “repetition is the single most important feature of ancient Hebrew rhetoric, being used for emphasis, wordplays, expressing the superlative, creating pathos, and structuring both parts and wholes of prophetic discourse. Its importance can hardly be overestimated. Repetitions can be sequential or placed in strategic collocations to provide balance. … [They] can form a tie-in between the beginning and the end.”1

Forms of repetition can be visible from the minute level of strophes and stanzas in poetry, to multiline units such as poems, speeches, and oracles. The principles of repetition are also seen in the structuring of character arcs and even as the backbone of whole books. This type of repetition is frequently called parallelism.

Because of the differing size and scope of repetition as well as their presence in both poetry and prose, scholars have differing opinions about what can be truly classified as parallelism.2  Donald W. Parry’s perspective positions parallelism equally with poetry and prose, noting that “not all parallelistic forms are poetic, for parallelism serves in a variety of rhetorical and literary functions.”2

Synonymous Parallelism

This type of parallelism “sets forth [its] ideas in the first line, then restates, reinforces or reconfigures them in the next line.”4  Note this example from the early chapters of Genesis.

            Adah and Zillah

Hear my voice;

            Ye wives of Lamech

hearken unto my speech. (Genesis 4:23)

“Adah and Zillah” are mirrored in the second line with “Ye wives of Lamech” while Lamech’s declaration is repeated with “Hear my voice” and “Hearken unto my speech.”

The same type of parallelism can be found in Moses 1:

For my works

are without end,

and also my words

for they never cease. (Moses 1:4)

The use of synonymous parallelism shows God equating his works with his words. Both, he says, are endless.

Synthetic Parallelism

Parry notes that this type of parallelism “is composed of two lines, neither of which are synonymous or antithetical. Rather, line one presents a declaration and line two gives something new or instructive to the first line.”5  Examples include Proverbs 1:7 and 2 Nephi 2:25. An oft quoted verse in the Book of Moses is also written in this form:

For behold, this is my work and my glory—
to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. (Moses 1:39)

Inverted Parallelism

Inverted Parallelism, or Chiasmus, is a type of parallelism where the repetition of elements is in an inverted order, rather than sequential. D. Lynn Johnson6  has made note of this arrangement in Moses 1:

A And it came to pass, as the voice was still speaking,

Moses cast his eyes and beheld the earth,

B yea, even all of it; and there was not a particle of it which he did not behold,

C discerning it by the Spirit of God.

D And he beheld also the inhabitants thereof,

D’ and there was not a soul which he beheld not;

C’ and he discerned them by the Spirit of God;

B’ and their numbers were great, even numberless as the sand upon the sea shore.

A’ And he beheld many lands; and each land was called earth, and there were inhabitants on the face thereof. (Moses 1:27-29)

Hebraisms

A Hebraism is a distinctive element of Hebrew occurring in another language. This includes traces of its unique characteristics which are still apparent even after translation. The presence of Hebraisms in the scriptural text are significant since they are grammatically problematic in the English language but are characteristic of good Hebrew grammar. The presence of Hebraic features would be indicative of Moses 1 being an ancient text.

Relative Clauses

John A. Tvedtnes described the relative clause: “In Hebrew, the word that marked the beginning of the clause (generally translated which or who in English) does not always closely follow the word it refers back to, as it usually does in English.”7  This type of construction is also manifest in the Book of Mormon and in Moses 1:

But ye know that the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea,
who were the armies of Pharaoh. (1 Nephi 17:27)

and by the Son I created them,
which is mine Only Begotten. (Moses 1:33)

Compound Prepositions

Simple prepositions are words such as in, on, under, after, and around, that establish a relationship between a noun and a pronoun. Compound prepositions perform the same function, but with a combination of prepositions which act as a single word. Examples include on top of, in front of, or over against. Parry demonstrates one example from the Old Testament, “The Lord God of Israel hath dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel” (Judges 11:23, emphasis added).8  Moses 1:1 contains an example of a compound preposition, where “Moses was caught up into an exceeding high mountain.”

Possessive Pronouns

The English language favors minimal use of possessive pronouns, while “Biblical Hebrew … regularly repeats [these] pronouns” to form them as a type of list.9  Compare this example from the Book of Joshua with Moses 1:

ye will save alive my father, and my mother, and my brethren, and my sisters (Joshua 2:13)

and there is no end to my works, neither to my words. For behold, this is my work and my glory (Moses 1:38-39)

Resumptive Repetition

The biblical authors often needed to offer additional explanation as they told their narratives, so they employed a technique that modern scholars have called resumptive repetition.10  The English language would add an aside to its discourse by the use of parenthesis, commas or dashes, and then continue with the original thought. The Bible, on the other hand, returns to its subject by repeating a key phrase from earlier in the narrative.

Here is an example of resumptive repetition in the Old Testament:

And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.
And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen.
…
And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.
And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them.
But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. (Exodus 14:22-23, 27-29)

And here is a similar example from Moses 1:

And, behold, thou art my son; wherefore look, and I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all, for my works are without end, and also my words, for they never cease.
Wherefore, no man can behold all my works, except he behold all my glory; and no man can behold all my glory, and afterwards remain in the flesh on the earth.
And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the Savior, for he is full of grace and truth; but there is no God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I know them all.
And now, behold, this one thing I show unto thee, Moses, my son, for thou art in the world, and now I show it unto thee. (Moses 1:4-7)

Figures of Speech

Understanding particular figures of speech (or idioms) is an important tool as these features illuminate the meanings of text when a more literal reading would be insufficient.

Antenantiosis

This figure of speech is “the practice of stating a proposition in terms of its opposite.”11  Two negatives are combined in a statement, one of which cancels the other out thereby creating a positive. Compare an example from the Proverbs with a verse from Moses 1:

the wicked shall not be unpunished:
but the seed of the righteous shall be delivered (Proverbs 11:21)

And he beheld also the inhabitants thereof,
and there was not a soul which he beheld not. (Moses 1:28a)

The technique of antenantiosis combines “not a soul” with “beheld not” to emphasize that Moses saw every living soul in his vision.

Litotes

Litotes is a figure of speech where something is dramatically understated in order to enhance or elevate something else. This is starkly apparent in Moses 1:10 where Moses declares that he is nothing in comparison to the glory and power of the Almighty and Endless God. Compare this statement with Abraham’s discussion with the Lord over the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah:

Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed. (Moses 1:10)

Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city because of five people?” (Genesis 18:27-28, NIV)

Not unlike Moses, Abraham acknowledges the might of God by comparing himself to dust and ashes.

Polysyndeton

Polysyndenton is a Greek word that translates to mean “many conjunctions” or more commonly “many ands.”12  This rhetorical device enumerates lists of things, but with the purpose of affecting the pace of the narrative. Bullinger notes that this form is designed to catch the attention of the reader and to isolate individual items in the list for singular consideration.13  Consider its use in 1 Samuel and in Moses 1:

And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father’s sheep,
and there came a lion,
and a bear,
and took a lamb out of the flock:
And I went out after him,
and smote him,
and delivered it out of his mouth:
and when he arose against me, I caught him by his beard,
and smote him,
and slew him. (1 Samuel 17:34-35)

And it came to pass that Moses looked,
and beheld the world upon which he was created;
and Moses beheld the world
and the ends thereof,
and all the children of men which are,
and which were created;
of the same he greatly marveled and wondered. (Moses 1:8)

Synecdoche

Where the part of something is used to represent the whole. Moses 1:1 and 1:11 use this figure, where speaking ‘face to face’ represents being in God’s whole presence:

He who has clean hands and a pure heart,
who does not lift up his soul to an idol
or swear by what is false. (Psalm 24:4)

And he saw God face to face,
and he talked with him (Moses 1:2)

Conclusion

The importance of understanding these forms and figures of speech is not to just recognize ancient Hebraic literary features in Moses 1, but also to help us read the scriptural texts as their authors intended. Recognizing the forms that ancient authors used to persuade their readers with power brings latter-day readers closer to seeing and hearing as their counterparts did long ago.

In closing, David Noel Freedman elucidates an attitude toward literary form and features that should be remembered by Latter-day Saint students of the scriptures. He speaks specifically of parallelism, but his words can be applied to everything we have discussed in this Essay. He said: “I am confident that the reader will readily agree … that the study of parallelism is, above all else, fun.”14

 

This Essay is adapted and expanded from Johnson, Mark J. “The lost prologue: Reading Moses Chapter One as an Ancient Text.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): 145-86. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-lost-prologue-reading-moses-chapter-one-as-an-ancient-text/. (accessed June 5, 2020).

Further Reading

Berlin, Adele. The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism. Revised and Expanded ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2008.

Johnson, Mark J. “The lost prologue: Reading Moses Chapter One as an Ancient Text.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): 145-86. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-lost-prologue-reading-moses-chapter-one-as-an-ancient-text/. (accessed June 5, 2020).

Parry, Donald W. Preserved in Translation: Hebrew and Other Ancient Literary Forms in the Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2020.

References

Berlin, Adele. The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism. Revised and Expanded ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2008.

Bullinger, E. W. Figures of Speech Used in the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Bake Book House, 1968.

Johnson, Mark J. “The lost prologue: Reading Moses Chapter One as an Ancient Text.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): 145-86.

Lundbom, Jack R. Biblical Rhetoric and Rhetorical Criticism. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2015.

Parry, Donald W. “Hebraisms and other ancient pecularities in the Book of Mormon.” In Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon, edited by Donald W. Parry, Daniel C. Peterson and John W. Welch, 155-189. Provo, UT: FARMS, 2002.

———. Poetic Parallelisms in the Book of Mormon. Provo, UT: The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2007. https://publications.mi.byu.edu/publications/bookchapters/Poetic_Parallelisms_in_the_Book_of_Mormon_The_Complete_Text_/Poetic%20Parallelisms%20in%20the%20Book%20of%20Mormon.pdf. (accessed August 9, 2017).

———. Preserved in Translation: Hebrew and Other Ancient Literary Forms in the Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2020.

Tvedtnes, John A. “The Hebrew background of the Book of Mormon.” In Rediscovering the Book of Mormon, edited by John L. Sorenson and Melvin J. Thorne, 77-91. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1991. http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books?bookid=72&chapid=867. (accessed March 22).

Welch, John W. “Antenantiosis in the Book of Mormon.” In Reexploring the Book of Mormon, edited by John W. Welch, 96-97. Salt Lake City, UT and Provo, UT: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1992. https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/node/175. (accessed May 3, 2020).

Notes on Figures

Figure 1. Photograph by Mark J. Johnson.

Footnotes

 

1 J. R. Lundbom, Biblical Rhetoric, pp. 167–68.

2 For a useful discussion, see A. Berlin, Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism, pp. 1–7.

3 D. W. Parry, Poetic Parallelisms, p. xi.

4 D. W. Parry, Preserved in Translation, p. 13.

5 D. W. Parry, Poetic Parallelisms, p. xxiv.

6 http://www.ldsgospeldoctrine.net/dlj/TheVisualScriptures-PearlofGreatPrice.pdf.

7 J. A. Tvedtnes, Hebrew Background, p. 87.

8 {Parry, 2002 #6565}, p. 172.

9 D. W. Parry, Preserved in Translation, p. 61.

10 D. W. Parry, Preserved in Translation, p. 57.

11 J. W. Welch, Antenantiosis, p. 96.

12 The use of the technicque of“many ands” as a syntactical technique is explored further in {Johnson, 2020 #6435}.

13 E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, p. 210.

14 David Noel Freedman, Foreword to A. Berlin, Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism, p. xi.

Posted on

A Literary Masterpiece: Many-Great Waters and Moses’ Mission to Baptize

Book of Moses Essay #43

Moses 1:25-26

With contribution by Matthew L. Bowen and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw

Download MP3 here

In the immediately preceding set of Essays,1  we focused on the narrative of Moses 1 and its interpretation. However, beginning with this Essay, we will turn our attention to some of the beautiful and meaningful ritual allusions and literary details of the chapter.

One of the most striking and neglected motifs in the Book of Moses — and for that matter in the Old Testament — is that of baptism. The truth that baptism was taught from the beginning as part of the doctrine of Christ constitutes one of the most precious teachings of the Pearl of Great Price.2  As we have discussed elsewhere,3  the Book of Moses describes how the name, titles, and aspects of the mission of Jesus Christ were known since the time of Adam and Eve. Vestiges of these ancient teachings survive in Jewish and early Christian tradition.

The Book of Moses situates references to baptism within the Primeval History between the creation of the Earth (including the creation of the “great waters”4 ) and the “uncreation” and “re-creation” of the Flood.5  Heading up the descriptions of the events of Creation and the retrospective references to baptism is the heavenly ascent of Moses.6 Following the defeat and expulsion of Satan (a motif that precedes baptism in some ancient Christian sources7  ), Moses’ interview with God resumes and God promises him, “thou shalt be made stronger than the many waters; for they shall obey thy command even as if thou wert God.”8

Below, we give an overview of the references to “many waters” and “great waters” in scripture and show how similar symbolism is associated with the bronze “sea” of Solomon’s temple. Then we will show how Moses, Enoch, and John the Baptist reenact this same symbolism as they fulfill their mission to baptize.

Many-Great Waters in Scripture and in the Symbolism of the Bronze Sea of Solomon’s Temple

The “many waters” or “great waters” found throughout scripture correspond to the “great waters” gathered together as “Sea” (including, oceans, rivers, lakes). In fact, the Moses account of creation describes them as such: “And I, God, made the firmament and divided the waters, yea, the great waters under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament, and it was so even as I spake.”9  Likewise, the creation account in the Book of Abraham designates the “gathered” waters on the earth as “Great Waters.”10

Isaiah’s use of the phrase mê tĕhôm rabbâ (“waters of the great deep” or “waters of the mighty Tehom”) is semantically and conceptually associated with the phrase mayim rabbîm (“many waters”11  or “mighty waters”12 ). Herbert G. May long ago connected Isaiah 51:9-10 with texts like Habakkuk 3:1513  where Habakkuk uses “many waters” (mayim rabbîm) in parallel with the sea (yām, cf. the Ugaritic/Canaanite deity Yamm): “Thou didst walk through the sea with thine horses, through the heap [surging] of great waters [many waters, mayim rabbîm].” He also notes that in Habakkuk 3:15 the “many waters” are “associated with the ‘rivers’ and the ‘sea’ which Yahweh fights and conquers with divine power and authority, even as Baal struggled with the Sea and River in the Ugaritic myth.”14

In the Book of Mormon, the collocations “many waters”15  and “great waters” both appear.16  Moreover, Nephi defines the Lehite name Irreantum17  in terms of the “many waters” that they beheld from the shores of the land Bountiful on the Arabian peninsula—waters which separated them from their final destination in the land of Promise and that they would thus need to cross.

Using similar symbology, Jacob, the brother of Nephi, understood Isaiah’s mythic telling of the exodus event in Israel’s salvation history as a metaphor for the Savior’s atonement and his bringing to pass the resurrection of the dead. Jacob connected the primordial deities or sea “monsters” of Isaiah 51:9-10 with Mot and Sheol18 —i.e. personified and deified Death and Hell: “O how great the goodness of our God, who prepareth a way for our escape from the grasp of this awful monster; yea, that monster, death and hell [cf. Mot and Sheol]” (2 Nephi 9:10); “And because of the way of the deliverance of our God, the Holy One of Israel, this death [cf. Mot], of which I have spoken, which is the temporal, shall deliver up its dead.”19  And both Nephi and Jacob understood Isaiah’s mythic language as ritual language, equating “the way” (Heb. derek) through the “sea” (yām) in the Exodus as envisaged in Isaiah 43:16 and 51:9-11 with the “the way” of “the doctrine of Christ” or the covenant path, which included the ordinance of baptism.20

Figure 2. Baptismal Font in the Salt Lake Temple, ca. 1912

The “many waters” or “great waters (mayim rabbîm) gathered and subordinated in the creation and the “Sea” (yām, or divinized Yamm) defeated by Yahweh in the Exodus appear to find their ritual and architectural realization in the bronze sea (or “brazen sea” yām hannĕḥōšet),21  also called the molten sea (yām mûṣāq)22  that stood in the outer court of Solomon’s temple. Regarding that bronze sea, David Calabro asserts: “While there is no evidence that the temple laver was used as a baptismal font, it was definitely large enough to suggest such a use, and Joseph Smith’s specifications for a baptismal font modeled after the Solomonic laver for the Nauvoo Temple show that he understood it in this connection.”23  The purification that preceded entry into the holy place in the temple corresponds to baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost in what Nephi called the doctrine of Christ.24

Moses’ Mission in Drawing Israel Out of Many-Great Waters

The dual etiology for Moses’ name given in Exodus 2:10 and Moses 1:25-27 both looks forward to his divinely appointed mission in which he will be “made stronger than many waters” and defeat “the Sea” (Hebrew yām, cf. the Canaanite deity Yamm) during the Exodus25  and also backward to the Creation of the “great waters” by “the word of [God’s] power.”26  A comparison of Moses 1:25-26 to Exodus 2:10, the Song of David parallel text, and Isaiah 63:11 helps us recognize and more fully appreciate the interrelationship between the name Moses and the act of “drawing” or “pulling” Israel out of the Sea (yām, cf. Yamm) or “many waters”:

Exodus 2:10; Psalms 18:16 [MT 17] / 2 Samuel 22:17; Isaiah 63:11

Moses 1:25-26

And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses [mōšeh]: and she said, Because I drew him out [mĕšîtihû] of the water. (Exodus 2:10)

 

He sent from above, he took me[;] he drew me out [yamšēnî] of many waters [Heb. mayim rabbîm] (Psalm 18:16/2 Samuel 22:17)

 

Then they [He] remembered the ancient days

Him [He] who pulled [mōšeh] His people out [of the water]

Where is He who brought them up from
the Sea [yām, cf. deified Yamm]? (Isaiah 63:11, njps)

 

And calling upon the name of God, he beheld his glory again, for it was upon him; and he heard a voice, saying: Blessed art thou, Moses [Egyptian, “begotten”; Heb. mōšeh “drawer” or “puller”] for I, the Almighty, have chosen thee, and thou shalt be made stronger than many waters [Heb. mayim rabbîm] for they shall obey thy command even as if thou wert God. And lo, I am with thee, even unto the end of thy days; for thou shalt deliver my people from bondage, even Israel my chosen. (Moses 1:25-26)

Each one of these texts attests the name Moses (Hebrew “drawer,” “puller”; cf. Egyptian “begotten” < ms[i]),27  the verb mšy (or both), and the image of birth/delivery from water. The phrase “many waters” in the Song of David28  and Moses 1:25 constitutes an important lexical link between these two texts. Realizing that the Psalms were the hymnal of the Jerusalem temple would suggest a ritual dimension to Psalm 18:16 (“He sent from above, he took me[;] he drew me out of many waters [mimmayim rabbîm]”) and the similarly-worded Psalm 144:7: “Send thine hand from above; rid me, and deliver me out of great waters [mimmayim rabbîm].” The image of the divine “hand from above” may, in addition, suggest a symbolic or ritual gesture.

Significantly, the term mayim rabbîm could also be translated as “mighty waters.”29  Thus, one way of reading the Lord’s promise to Moses’s calling to deliver Israel is that he would be made mightier than “mighty waters” through his priesthood.

Indeed, it is Moses’ power in the priesthood that allows him to overcome the waters, as described by Hugh Nibley: “This is the de profundis. That’s the 130th Psalm. … ‘Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord’”30  With similarity to the Egyptian myth of Osiris,31  the “final test is the baptism. … Moses is delivered from the waters and comes out.”32  In the typology of such tests, the righteous are raised in glory while the wicked drown and perish:33

Thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them: they sank as lead in the mighty waters.

Moses experiences something similar to Jonah the prophet who, when swallowed by the fish “for three days and three nights,”34  and “in the midst of the seas [yāmmîm; cf. Yamm]; and the floods [wĕnāhār, literally, ‘and the river’] compassed [him] about,”35   he cried “out of the belly of hell [mibbeṭen šĕʾôl].”36  Assaulted by Satan’s rage, “Moses began to fear, and as he began to fear, he saw the bitterness of hell [Sheol]. Nevertheless calling upon God, he received strength…”37  Just as the Lord answered Jonah’s prayer and “brought [his] life up from corruption,”38  Moses defeats Satan through the Lord’s “strength”—strength which the Lord subsequently promises would reside in Moses himself: “thou shalt be made stronger than many waters; for they shall obey thy command as if thou wert God.”39

“Because There Were Many Waters There”

Figure 3. Dramatization of John the Baptist baptizing Jesus in the Jordan River.

The foregoing provides the necessary backdrop for understanding the symbolism of the place where John the Baptist encountered his disciples: “And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water [Greek hydata polla, many waters40 ] there: and they came, and were baptized.”41

This statement, like so many words and images in the gospel of John, constitutes a double entendre. To be sure, John baptized in Aenon or ʿēnayim (“double spring”)42  because “water was abundant there” (NRSV)—meaning there was water sufficient to completely immerse an individual. However, it appears that John also wished to draw a connection between the waters of baptism and the “many waters” (hydata polla = mayim rabbîm) in the extant scriptural tradition and to draw upon the Old Testament symbolism and typology of that image.43   If the collocation “many waters” seems too dramatic44  as a description for the springs in Aenon, which are near the Jordan River where Jesus was baptized45  (though the river itself remains unmentioned in John 3),46  perhaps this should be taken as further evidence that John is using the description evoke the “many waters”/“great waters” passages from Psalms 18:16; 29:3; 32:6; 77:19; 93:4 107:23; 144:7.47

Jesus’ baptism was much more than a ritual ablution. He was baptized in the river Jordan, because baptism requires “many waters” that are “overcome” or “defeated” by divine power (priesthood power) as an essential aspect of the typology and symbolism.

Conclusion

In the figure of Moses a salient aspect of baptism’s symbolism thus emerges: the one who baptizes acts “as if [the baptizer] wer[e] God.”48  The baptizer, having earlier been “drawn from the water”49  and “made stronger than the many waters”50  draws or pulls others and, in terms of ritual, “ma[kes them] stronger than the many waters.”51  The “many waters” or “great waters” ultimately obeyed Moses’ “command even as if [he] wer[e] God,” obeying the same divine authority with which one baptizes—namely, the authority through which one “draws” or “pulls” (mōšeh) from the “many waters.”

In light of the pattern exemplified in Moses 1, it is no surprise that Enoch later states that the Lord specifically called him to baptize: “And he gave unto me a commandment that I should baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, which is full of grace and truth, and of the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and the Son.”52

 

Adapted and updated from Bowen, Matthew L. “‘Thou Shalt Be Made Stronger than the Many Waters’: The Interlingual Meaning of Moses and Its Implications for Moses 1:25-26 and John 3:23 (Unpublished manuscript).” 2020.

Further Reading

Belnap, Daniel. “‘I Will Contend with Them That Contendeth with Thee’: The Divine Warrior in Jacob’s Speech of 2 Nephi 6–10.” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Restoration Scripture 17, no. 1-2 (2008): 20-39.

Bowen, Matthew L. “Messengers of the covenant: Mormon’s doctrinal use of Malachi 3:1 in Moroni 7:29-32.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 31 (2019): 111-38.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve. 2014 Updated ed. In God’s Image and Likeness 1. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014, pp. 60-61, n. 32a; pp. 93-94 n. 1d;. pp. 102-103 n. 5c.

Calabro, David. “Joseph Smith and the architecture of Genesis.” In The Temple: Ancient and Restored. Proceedings of the 2014 Temple on Mount Zion Symposium, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry. Temple on Mount Zion 3, 165-81. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2016.

References

Belnap, Daniel. “‘I Will Contend with Them That Contendeth with Thee’: The Divine Warrior in Jacob’s Speech of 2 Nephi 6–10.” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Restoration Scripture 17, no. 1-2 (2008): 20-39. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1438&context=jbms. (accessed July 26, 2020).

Bowen, Matthew L. “‘Most desirable above all things’: Mary and Mormon.” In Name as Key-Word: Collected Essays on Onomastic Wordplay and the Temple in Mormon Scripture, edited by Matthew L. Bowen, 17-47. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2018.

———. “Messengers of the covenant: Mormon’s doctrinal use of Malachi 3:1 in Moroni 7:29-32.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 31 (2019): 111-38. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/messengers-of-the-covenant-mormons-doctrinal-use-of-malachi-31-in-moroni-729-32/. (accessed July 26, 2020).

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve. 2014 Updated ed. In God’s Image and Likeness 1. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014. www.templethemes.net.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., and David J. Larsen. Enoch, Noah, and the Tower of Babel. In God’s Image and Likeness 2. Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2014. www.templethemes.net.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., and Matthew L. Bowen. ““By the Blood Ye Are Sanctified”: The Symbolic, Salvific, Interrelated, Additive, Retrospective, and Anticipatory Nature of the Ordinances of Spiritual Rebirth in John 3 and Moses 6.” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 24 (2017): 123-316. Reprint, In Stephen D. Ricks and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, eds. Sacred Time, Sacred Space, and Sacred Meaning. Proceedings of the Third Interpreter Foundation Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, 5 November 2016, Temple on Mount Zion Series. Vol. 4. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2020, pp. 43-237. www.templethemes.net. (accessed January 10, 2018).

Calabro, David. “Joseph Smith and the architecture of Genesis.” In The Temple: Ancient and Restored. Proceedings of the 2014 Temple on Mount Zion Symposium, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry. Temple on Mount Zion 3, 165-81. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2016. https://interpreterfoundation.org/conferences/2014-temple-on-mount-zion-conference/program-schedule/. (accessed October 27, 2014).

Clines, David J. A. “Noah’s Flood: I: The Theology of the Flood Narrative.” Faith and Thought 100, no. 2 (1972-1973): 128-42. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.730.8892&rep=rep1&type=pdf. (accessed July 25, 2020).

Faulring, Scott H., Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews, eds. Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts. Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004.

Frederick, Nicholas J. “Line within line: An intertextual analysis of Mormon scripture and the prologue of the gospel of John.” Doctoral Dissertation, Claremont Graduate University, 2013.

Hoskisson, Paul Y., Brian M. Hauglid, and John Gee. “What’s in a Name? Irreantum.” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 11, no. 1 (2002): 90-93. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1349&context=jbms. (accessed July 26, 2020).

May, Herbert G. “Some cosmic connotations of Mayim Rabbîmi.” Journal of Biblical Literature 74, no. 1 (1955): 9-21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3261949.pdf?seq=1. (accessed July 26, 2020).

Newheart, Michael Willett. “Aenon.” In The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, edited by Katharine Doob Sakenfeld. Vol. 1, 60. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006.

Nibley, Hugh W. 1986. Teachings of the Pearl of Great Price. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), Brigham Young University, 2004.

Parker, Jared T. “The doctrine of Christ in 2 Nephi 31-32 as an approach to the vision of the tree of life.” In The Things Which My Father Saw: The 40th Annual Brigham Young University Sidney B. Sperry Symposium, edited by Daniel L. Belnap, Gaye Strathearn and Stanley A. Johnson, 161-78. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2011.

Reynolds, Noel B. “This is the way.” Religious Educator 14, no. 3 (2013): 79-91. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/1477/. (accessed July 26, 2020).

———. “The ancient doctrine of the two ways and The Book of Mormon.” BYU Studies Quarterly 56, no. 3 (2017): 49-78. https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/ancient-doctrine-two-ways-and-book-mormon. (accessed August 15, 2019).

Talmage, James E. The House of the Lord. Salt Lake City, Utah: The Deseret News, 1912. https://archive.org/stream/houseoflordstudy00talm#page/n0/mode/2up. (accessed August 5, 2014).

Wayment, Thomas A., ed. The Complete Joseph Smith Translation of the Old Testament: A Side-by-Side Comparison with the King James Version. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2009.

Notes on Figures

Figure 1. Photograph by Matthew L. Bowen.

Figure 2. Photo by C. R. Savage Co., Salt Lake City, Utah, published in J. E. Talmage, House of the Lord (1912), p. 262 Plate 11. Public Domain. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Salt_Lake_temple_baptismal_font.jpg (accessed July 25, 2020).

Figure 3. The Baptism of Jesus (Matthew 3:13-17), The Life of Jesus Christ Bible Videos, about 2:14. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bible-videos/videos/the-baptism-of-jesus?lang=eng (accessed July 25, 2020).

Footnotes

 

1 Essays #31-42.

2 Moses 6:53, 60, 65-66; 7:11; 8:24.

3 See Essays #15.

4 Moses 2:7.

5 See, e.g., D. J. A. Clines, Noah’s Flood 1; J. M. Bradshaw et al., God’s Image 2, pp. 252-336.

6 Moses 1.

7 See, e.g., J. M. Bradshaw et al., By the Blood Ye Are Sanctified, pp. 144–146.

8 S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, OT1 Moses 1:25, p. 85. See also T. A. Wayment, Complete JST of the OT, Moses 1:26, p. 3.

9 Moses 2:7.

10 Abraham 4:10: “And the Gods pronounced the dry land, Earth; and the gathering together of the waters, pronounced they, Great Waters; and the Gods saw that they were obeyed”; Abraham 4:22: “And the Gods said: We will bless them, and cause them to be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas or great waters; and cause the fowl to multiply in the earth.”

11 Numbers 24:7; Psalm 18:16 [MT 17]/1 Samuel 22:17; Psalm 29:3; 93:4; Song of Solomon 8:7; Isaiah 17:13; Jeremiah 51:13; Ezekiel 19:10; 43:2.

12 Psalms 32:6; 77:19 [MT 20]; 107:23; 144:7; Isaiah 23:3; Jeremiah 41:12; 51:55; Ezekiel 1:24; 27:26; 32:13; Habakkuk 3:15.

13 H. G. May, Some Cosmic Connotations, p. 10.

14 Ibid., p. 10.

15 1 Nephi 13:10, 12-13, 29; 14:11-12; Ether 2:6; 6:7; and possibly Mosiah 8:8 and Mormon 6:4.

16 1 Nephi 17:17; Omni 1:16; Ether 6:3. In 1 Nephi 17:17.

17 P. Y. Hoskisson et al., What’s in a Name? Irreantum, pp. 92-93.

18 See especially D. Belnap, I Will Contend.

19 M. L. Bowen, Messengers of the Covenant, pp. 123-127.

20 See especially 2 Nephi 31:13-18, 21. On Nephi’s identification of the “doctrine of Christ” as “the way,” see N. B. Reynolds, This Is the Way; see also N. B. Reynolds, Ancient Doctrine of the Two Ways.

21 2 Kings 25:13; Jeremiah 52:17; 1 Chronicles 18:8.

22 1 Kings 7:37.

23 D. Calabro, Joseph Smith and the Architecture, p. 172.

24 J. T. Parker, Doctrine of Christ, p. 173. See also his broader discussion of the correspondence between the doctrine of Christ, Lehi’s Dream, Nephi’s Vision, and the temple in pp. 172-175.

25 Exodus 10:19; 13:18; 15:4, 22; 1 Corinthians 10:1-2; 1 Nephi 4:2, 17:26; Helaman 8:11; Doctrine and Covenants 8:3. The definite article in “the many waters” is omitted in the canonized version.

26 Moses 1:32, 2:1, 5. See Essay #39 and J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, pp. 60-61, n. 32a; pp. 93-94 n. 1d;. pp. 102-103 n. 5c. Nicholas Frederick observes (N. J. Frederick, Line Within Line., p. 336):

While “word” is written in lower-case in Moses 1:32, when the phrase “word of my power” occurs again in Moses 2:5, the original JST manuscripts record a reading of “Word of my power” [S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, OT1, p. 86. The term “word” is in lower case in OT2, p. 595], perhaps suggesting that Joseph viewed “Word” or “word” as something more than just a spoken command, closer to the Johannine Logos.

27 M. L. Bowen, Most Desirable, pp. 23-24.

28 Psalm 18:16 [MT 17]; 1 Samuel 22:17.

29 Cf. Exodus 15:10 “mighty waters” (bĕmayim ʾaddîrîm); Isaiah 43:16 “mighty waters” (ûbĕmayim ʿazzîm).

30 H. W. Nibley, Teachings of the PGP, 18, p. 219. See Psalm 130:1.

31 Cf. the text of the Shabaka stone as described by Nibley in, e.g., J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, p. 515.

32 H. W. Nibley, Teachings of the PGP, 10, p. 118.

33 Exodus 15:10. See Exodus 14:27-30; 1 Corinthians 10:1-2; Hebrews 11:29; 1 Peter 3:18-21.

34 Jonah 1:17 [MT 2:1].

35 Jonah 2:3 [MT 2:4].

36 Jonah 2:2 [MT 2:3].

37 Jonah 2:1 [MT 2:3], 6 (same as in MT).

38 Moses 1:21-22.

39 Moses 1:25.

40 Revelation 1:15; 14:2; 17:1; 19:6.

41 John 3:23.

42 M. W. Newheart, Aenon, writes: “It is uncertain as to where Aenon was, but two sites are often mentioned. The first is 6-8 mi. south of Scythopolis, in the southwestern corner of the DECAPOLIS. Eusebius (Onomasticon 40:1) and Jerome (Epistle 73) both support this location. The second suggested site is on the eastern side of the Jordan, in Perea. This suggestion is supported by a 6th cent. map on a church floor in MEDEBA, which places Aenon opposite BETHBARA” (capitalization in original). He further notes: “Also from the 6th cent. Is the tradition from the pilgrim guide Antonius that there was a cave on the eastern location where John baptized and Jesus stayed at the time of his baptism.”

43 See, e.g., Psalms 18:16 [LXX]; 144:7.

44 Samuel Zinner (personal communication, notes in possession of authors) remains unconvinced that John’s use of hydata polla constitutes an echo of Hebrew Bible mayim rabbîm passages. He asks, “would we not expect at least a river (even granted that the Jordan is there, but unmentioned)?” We answer: not necessarily. We recall Jeremiah’s description of the pools of Gibeon in Jeremiah 41:12 as “great waters”/“many waters” (mayim rabbîm; LXX Jeremiah 48:12, hydatos pollou). Zinner further suggests that “the many waters of John [3] hint at Ezekiel 1’s many waters, since the river Jordan’s etymology can be associated with the descent to the chariot. The descent of a dove at Jesus’ Jordan baptism is of a piece with this. To this we would add that if Jordan can be understood in as “descent” or “place of descent” we can detect additional wordplay in Jordan in Nephi’s vision of the tree of life, which includes a vision of Jesus’s baptism and the descent of Holy Ghost and other heavenly beings (1 Nephi 11:16, 26-27, 30; study forthcoming).

45 See Matthew 4:13-17; Mark 1:9.

46 John earlier mentions John the Baptist’s baptizing activities in “Bethabara beyond Jordan” in John 1:28. Cf. 1 Nephi 10:9.

47 LXX Psalms 17:17 (=Psalms 18:16 [17]); 28:3 (=29:3); 31:6 (=32:6); 92:4 (=93:4); 106:23 (=107:23); 143:7 (=144:7) all employ forms of hydata polla (hydatōn pollōn, hydasi pollois) to translate Hebrew mayim rabbîm.

48 S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, OT1 Moses 1:25, p. 85.

49 Cf. Exodus 2:10.

50 S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, OT1 Moses 1:26, p. 85.

51 Ibid., OT1 Moses 1:25, p. 85.

52 Moses 7:3.

Posted on

The Words of God

Book of Moses Essay #42

Moses 1:1–7, 35, 40–42

With contribution by Matthew L. Bowen and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw

Download MP3 here

Moses 1 constitutes a self-contained literary unit and prologue1  to the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, demarcated by an inclusio.2  The Latin word inclusio (literally, an “inclosing” or “closing-in”) serves as “a technical term for a passage of scripture in which the opening phrase or idea is repeated, paraphrased, or otherwise returned to at the close.”3

Furthermore, this inclusio begins with an incipit,4  another Latin term meaning “it begins.” An incipit—or an incipit title—is derived from the opening word or words of a text and is typically provided in the absence of an official name or title for a work. In this case, the incipit is signaled by the following text: “The words of God, which he gave  unto Moses.”5  While this seems to clearly mark the beginning of the inclusio, one can plausibly argue for a closing bracket that occurs in any one of three adjacent texts.

The first possible closing bracket occurs in Moses 1:40: “And now, Moses, my son, I will speak unto thee concerning this earth upon which thou standest; and thou shalt write the things [words6] which I shall speak.” The second candidate for a closing bracket comprises part of the parenthetical statement in Moses 1:42: “These words were spoken unto Moses in the mount.”7  This option works if one counts the words in this verse as part of the vision.8  The third potential closing bracket is found in Moses 2:1a: “write the words which I speak.”9  Under any of these three scenarios, the Moses 1 (or Moses 1:1–2:1a) text with its inclusio establishes a dominant theme that threads its way throughout the early chapters of JST Genesis, namely the divine “word” and its efficacy.

The opening phrase “The words of God, which he spake unto Moses” looks and functions much like the incipit of the Book of Deuteronomy: “These be the words [Hebrew, ʾēlleh haddĕbārîm] which Moses spake unto all Israel.”10  In both Deuteronomy and the vision of Moses, the incipit title establishes a claim of divine authority for what follows. In the vision of Moses, “The words of God” claims divine authority for not only the account of Moses’ vision, but also the subsequent revelation and its inspired textual recuperations. Moreover, the incipit (“The words of God which he spake unto Moses”) together with the subsequent temporal clause (“at a time when Moses was caught up into an exceedingly high mountain”) establishes a temple context for the vision recorded in vv. 2–9, the temptation that follows in vv. 12–23, and the second, grander vision which begins thereafter in vv. 24–41.

Additional repetition of words and phrases within Moses 1 emphasizes that the “endlessness” of God’s works are mirrored in the “ceaselessness” or “endlessness” of God’s words. This tight genetic pairing begins with the Lord’s declaration to Moses in the first vision, “And, behold, thou art my son; wherefore look, and I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all, for my works are without end, and also my words, for they never cease.”11 The Lord reiterates and reinforces this idea to Moses in the second vision when he states in the OT1 manuscript of Moses 1:38–39: “And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works, neither to my words. For behold this is my work to my glory to the immortality & the eternal life of man.”12

Thus one of the most noteworthy aspects of the divine word/language theme in the Book of Moses is that the narrative directly links the “endlessness” of God’s “works” and “words” to the notion of endless scriptural “words.”13  This theme directly bears on what we recognize today as the notion of an open-ended concept of scripture.14  The Lord commanded Moses to write the words spoken on this occasion, words with intrinsic sacral15  and authoritative character: “And now, Moses, my son, I will speak unto thee concerning this earth upon which thou standest; and thou shalt write the things [words] which I shall speak.”16  Nevertheless, he also anticipated the human diminution of those written words during a process of textual transmission at the hands of unbelieving tradents:17

            A         And in a day when the children of men shall esteem my words as naught

                        B           and take many of them from the book which thou shalt write,

                                    C         behold, I will raise up another like unto thee;

                        B′         and they shall be had again

            A′        among the children of men—among as many as shall believe.

As has been noted elsewhere,18  the Lord’s words in Moses 1:41 anticipate a future “taking [away]” or diminution of those same words similar to the diminution of the divine “word” anticipated in the Deuteronomic iterations of the so-called “canon formula.” Moses charges Israel: “Ye shall not add [lōʾ tōsipû] unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”19  This type of text has sometimes been called a “canon-formula,” because it “makes it clear that its intent is to preclude both literary and doctrinal innovation by safeguarding the textual status quo.”20  Some scholars also refer to it as a Textsicherungsformel, literally a “text-securing-formula”—something like the ancient equivalent of today’s “digital signatures” that can be used to protect the integrity of a document.

The Deuteronomic canon-formula, in turn, constitutes the source of the more famous canon-formula in Revelation 22:18–19: “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”21

The Lord’s earlier statements that his “words” have “no end” and “never cease” become the basis for His promise that “they shall be had again”—in other words, re-added. By implication, human efforts “to take many of them” away from “the book which [Moses] would write” and from future repositories of divine words22  or otherwise limit them through a closed “canon” will ultimately fail.

In sum, the view of the written “word” presented at the outset of the Book of Moses is that the Lord’s words can be “taken” away or otherwise diminished in their human repositories by human custodians. Nevertheless, these words “shall be had again.”23  And, as this revelation will later emphasize, they must be fulfilled.24

This article is adapted from Bowen, Matthew L. “‘By the word of my power’: The divine word in the Book of Moses,” Presented at the conference entitled “Tracing Ancient Threads of the Book of Moses” (September 18–19, 2020), Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2020.

Further Reading

Bowen, Matthew L. “‘And They Shall Be Had Again’: Onomastic Allusions to Joseph in Moses 1:41 in View of the So-called Canon Formula.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 32 (2019): 297–304. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/and-they-shall-be-had-again-onomastic-allusions-to-joseph-in-moses-141-in-view-of-the-so-called-canon-formula/. (accessed July 20, 2020).

Calabro, David. “Joseph Smith and the architecture of Genesis.” In The Temple: Ancient and Restored. Proceedings of the 2014 Temple on Mount Zion Symposium, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry. Temple on Mount Zion 3, 165–181. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2016. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/events/2014-temple-on-mount-zion-conference/program-schedule/. (accessed October 27, 2014).

Holland, Jeffrey R. “‘My words… never cease’.” Ensign 28, May 2008, 91–94. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2008/05/my-words-never-cease?lang=eng. (accessed July 9, 2020).

Johnson, Mark J. “The lost prologue: Reading Moses Chapter One as an Ancient Text.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): 145–186. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-lost-prologue-reading-moses-chapter-one-as-an-ancient-text/. (accessed June 5, 2020).

Morrison, Alexander B. “The Latter-day Saint concept of canon.” In Historicity and the Latter-day Saint Scriptures, edited by Paul Y. Hoskisson, 1–16. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Religious Studies Center, 2001.

Levinson, Bernard. “‘You must not add anything to what I command you’: Paradoxes of canon and authorship in ancient Israel.” Numen 50, no. 1 (2002): 1–51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228204266_%27_%27You_Must_Not_Add_Anything_to_What_I_Command_You%27_Paradoxes_of_Canon_and_Authorship_in_Ancient_Israel%27. (accessed July 9, 2020).

References

Bowen, Matthew L. “‘And They Shall Be Had Again’: Onomastic Allusions to Joseph in Moses 1:41 in View of the So-called Canon Formula.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 32 (2019): 297-304. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/and-they-shall-be-had-again-onomastic-allusions-to-joseph-in-moses-141-in-view-of-the-so-called-canon-formula/. (accessed July 20, 2020).

Calabro, David. “Joseph Smith and the architecture of Genesis.” In The Temple: Ancient and Restored. Proceedings of the 2014 Temple on Mount Zion Symposium, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry. Temple on Mount Zion 3, 165-81. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2016. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/events/2014-temple-on-mount-zion-conference/program-schedule/. (accessed October 27, 2014).

Faulring, Scott H., Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews, eds. Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts. Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004.

Holland, Jeffrey R. 1999. “Cast Not Away Therefore Your Confidence” (BYU Devotional Address, 2 March 1999).  In BYU Speeches (Reprinted in Ensign, 30:3 [March 2000]). https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/jeffrey-r-holland/cast-not-away-therefore-your-confidence/ , https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2000/03/cast-not-away-therefore-your-confidence?lang=eng . Video dramatization: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2011-03-50-i-am-a-son-of-god?lang=eng. (accessed June 13, 2020).

———. “‘My words… never cease’.” Ensign 28, May 2008, 91-94. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2008/05/my-words-never-cease?lang=eng. (accessed July 9, 2020).

Hoskisson, Paul Y. “Straightening things out: The use of ‘strait” and ‘straight’ in the Book of Mormon.” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 (2003): 58-71, 114-17. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1326&context=jbms. (accessed July 9, 2020).

Johnson, Mark J. “The lost prologue: Reading Moses Chapter One as an Ancient Text.” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): 145-86. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-lost-prologue-reading-moses-chapter-one-as-an-ancient-text/. (accessed June 5, 2020).

Levinson, Bernard. “‘You must not add anything to what I command you’: Paradoxes of canon and authorship in ancient Israel.” Numen 50, no. 1 (2002): 1-51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228204266_%27_%27You_Must_Not_Add_Anything_to_What_I_Command_You%27_Paradoxes_of_Canon_and_Authorship_in_Ancient_Israel%27. (accessed July 9, 2020).

Morrison, Alexander B. “The Latter-day Saint concept of canon.” In Historicity and the Latter-day Saint Scriptures, edited by Paul Y. Hoskisson, 1-16. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Religious Studies Center, 2001.

Soulen, Richard N., and R. Kendall Soulen. Handbook of Biblical Criticism. 3rd, revised ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2001.

Notes on Figures

Figure 1. From the video dramatization of J. R. Holland, “Cast Not Away Therefore Your Confidence” (BYU Devotional Address, 2 March 1999).

Footnotes

 

1 See, e.g., M. J. Johnson, Lost Prologue.

2 Ibid., pp. 156, 161.

3 R. N. Soulen et al., Handbook of Biblical Criticism, p. 85.

4 From the Latin word, incipit, which means “it begins.” An incipit—or an incipit title—is provided in the absence of an official name or title for a work.

5 S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, Moses 1:1, OT1 Page 1, p. 83, emphasis added by the authors in all scriptural citations.

6 Hebrew dābār can denote both “word” and “thing.” See, e.g., P. Y. Hoskisson, Straightening Things Out , p. 71. The same is true of Egyptian md.t (later mt.t).

7 D. Calabro, Joseph Smith and the Architecture, p. 169.

8 Ibid. , p. 169.

9 M. J. Johnson, Lost Prologue, p. 156.

10 Deuteronomy 1:1.

11 Moses 1:4.

12 S. H. Faulring et al., Original Manuscripts, Moses 1:38-39, OT1 Page 2, p. 86.

13 J. R. Holland, Words.

14 A. B. Morrison, Canon.

15 Cf. The Lord’s words to Oliver Cowdery in Doctrine and Covenants 9:9: “you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.”

16 Moses 1:40.

17 Moses 1:41.

18 M. L. Bowen, And They Shall Be Had Again.

19 Deuteronomy 4:2; see also Deuteronomy 12:32 [MT 13:1]; cf. 5:22 [MT 18].

20 B. Levinson, You Must Not Add, p. 7.

21 In recent centuries, the canonical position of the book of Revelation has had the practical effect of making its canon-formula (possibly itself an addition to the text of Revelation) a de facto canon-formula for the entire biblical corpus, as viewed by some Protestants who also embrace the notion of sola scriptura (“by scripture alone”). However, as Bernard Levinson notes to the contrary: “The association [of the ‘canon-formula’] with any notion of canon … marks a post-biblical development.” Ibid., p. 6. See, e.g., this statement (https://zrhaydon1.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/canon-vs-scripture-are-they-different-the-same-or-complicated/):

Stephen Chapman rightly suggests that understanding the tension between “canon” and “scripture” means understanding the “interpretive value” of these concepts in reference to Ancient Israel (87). How would these ancient communities have thought of “canon” or “scripture”? It seems anachronistic to impose something like “canon” (a closed list of books) on Ancient Israel, especially if books were still “migrating” between corpuses (like Daniel between the Prophets and the Writings). Equally extreme is to believe that “scripture” has no relationship with the constraining aspect of “canon,” as if to think “scripture” meant a free-flowing stream of religious books that moved (and continue to move) in and out of authoritative status depending on the whim of the community.

22 See, e.g., 1 Nephi 13:26–29.

23 Moses 1:41.

24 Moses 4:30; 5:15, 59; 6:30.

Posted on

Moses in the Presence of God

Book of Moses Essay #41

Moses 1:31, chapters 2-4

With contribution by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Matthew L. Bowen, David J. Larsen, and Stephen T. Whitlock

Download MP3 here

In this Essay, we will discuss how Moses and Abraham speak with the Lord, and how both are given a vision of the Creation, the Garden of Eden, and the Fall from within the heavenly veil. Significantly, in explicit contradiction to the text of ApAb where Yaho’el declared to Abraham: “the Eternal One… himself you will not see,”1  the fourteenth–century Christian illustrator of the Codex Sylvester seems to have had no qualms about representing God visually.2  Commenting on these sorts of contradictions, Margaret Barker observes:3

To see the glory of the Lord’s presence — to see beyond the veil — was the greatest blessing. The high priest used to bless Israel with the words: “The Lord  bless you and keep you: The Lord make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious unto you: The Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace.”4  … Seeing the glory, however, became controversial. Nobody knows why. There is one strand in the Old Testament that is absolutely opposed to any idea of seeing the divine… [On the other hand,] Jesus said: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”;5  and John saw “one seated on the throne.”6  There can be no doubt where the early Christians stood on this matter.

Figure 2. Resemblances for the Prophet in the Presence of God (Moses 1:31–40)

God’s Purpose and Will Are His Own

As the Book of Moses refers to “mine own purpose” and the “wisdom [that] remaineth in me,”7  so ApAb, in the answer to Abraham’s second question after his vision of the Fall, God declares “the will desired by me” is “inevitable” [i.e., “sure to come”8 ] just “as the will of your father is in him.” Kulik sees a “very similar context” in Ephesians 1:11, which combines the concepts of “purpose” and “will”: “predestined according to the purpose of him who does all things according to the will desired by him.”9

Alexander Kulik concludes that “we are dealing here [in ApAb] with the rabbinic conception of free will combined with the inevitability of God’s will (predetermination).”10  Similarly, in the Jewish Mishnah we read: “Everything is foreseen, and free choice is given.”11

The Book of Moses phrase “it remaineth in me” subtly echoes scriptural passages that depict God and wisdom as inseparably associated since before the creation of the earth.12  This exclusive relationship makes the mysteries of true wisdom inaccessible to man except as made known through God Himself.13  The Book of Mormon employs similar phraseology to describe how God’s hidden intentions—in this case the preservation of Nephite records — are “wise purposes in him” — things that can only be known by direct revelation.14  Note that in Moses 1:31, although God is saying he has a wise purpose, it does not seem that He tells Moses what the reason is.

Seeing the Lord Face to Face

In the illustration above, Abraham and Yaho’el are “traveling … about the air”15  with “no ground [beneath] to which [Abraham] could fall prostrate.”16  The figure pictured on the throne seems to be the Christ.17  His identity is indicated by the cruciform markings on His nimbus. Behind the enthroned Christ is a second figure, perhaps alluding to the statement in ApAb that “Michael is with me [i.e., the Lord] in order to bless you forever.”18

Beneath the throne are fiery seraphim and many-eyed “wheels” praising God. The throne is surrounded by a series of heavenly veils19  separating the Lord from the material world — the latter being signified by the outermost dark blue veil. The representation of the veils as multicolored may stem from an interpretation of Ezekiel 1:28, where the glory of the Lord is likened to a rainbow. In the depiction shown here, the illustrator has deliberately chosen to use the colors of red, green, and blue.20

Vision of the Creation, the Garden of Eden, and the Fall

At this point, just as Moses is shown the events of the Creation and the Fall,21  ApAb describes how the great patriarch looked down to see the affairs of what is called in modern revelation the “kingdoms of a lower order.”22  The Lord’s voice commanded Abraham to “look,” and a series of heavenly veils were opened beneath his feet.23  Like Moses, Abraham is shown the heavenly plan for creation — “the creation that was depicted of old24  on this expanse” (21:125 ), its realization on the earth (21:3–5), the Garden of Eden and the Fall of Adam and Eve (21:6), and the spirits of all men — with certain ones “prepared to be born of [Abraham] and to be called [God’s] people (21:7–22:5).” 26 When Abraham is told again to “Look … at the picture,” he sees Satan inciting the Fall of Adam and Eve (23:1–14),27  just as Moses saw these events following his own heavenly ascent (Moses 2-4).28

Conclusion

A close examination of the details of the account of Moses’ heavenly ascent in the context of its overall structure throws important light on the significance of temple ordinances performed in our day. As we have seen in the evidence assembled in the series of Essays #31–41, parallels with other ancient texts, such as the Apocalypse of Abraham, confirm the basic temple pattern both in its content and sequence, and constitute an impressive witness of the antiquity of the text restored by Joseph Smith’s revelations. Hugh Nibley concluded as a result of his study: “These parallel accounts, separated by centuries, cannot be coincidence. Nor can all the others.”29

This article is adapted from Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., David J. Larsen, and Stephen T. Whitlock. “Moses 1 and the Apocalypse of Abraham: Twin sons of different mothers?” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 38 (2020): 179-290. www.templethemes.net.

Further Reading

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve. 2014 Updated ed. In God’s Image and Likeness 1. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014, pp. 64-65. www.templethemes.net.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., David J. Larsen, and Stephen T. Whitlock. “Moses 1 and the Apocalypse of Abraham: Twin sons of different mothers?” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 36 (2020): in press.

Draper, Richard D., S. Kent Brown, and Michael D. Rhodes. The Pearl of Great Price: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005, p. 32.

Nibley, Hugh W. “To open the last dispensation: Moses chapter 1.” In Nibley on the Timely and the Timeless: Classic Essays of Hugh W. Nibley, edited by Truman G. Madsen, 1-20. Provo, UT: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1978, p. 13.

Nibley, Hugh W. 1986. Teachings of the Pearl of Great Price. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), Brigham Young University, 2004, pp. 222-223.

References

Alexander, Philip S. “3 (Hebrew Apocalypse of) Enoch.” In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. Vol. 1, 223-315. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1983.

Barker, Margaret. The Gate of Heaven: The History and Symbolism of the Temple. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK), 1991.

———. The Great Angel: A Study of Israel’s Second God. Louisville, KY: Westminster / John Knox Press, 1992.

———. An Extraordinary Gathering of Angels. London, England: MQ Publications, 2004.

———. The Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of God. London, England: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK), 2007.

———. Christmas: The Original Story. London, England: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2008.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve. 2014 Updated ed. In God’s Image and Likeness 1. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014. www.templethemes.net.

Collins, Adela Yarbro. “Paul, Jewish mysticism, and spirit possession.” In Apocalypticism and Mysticism in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity, edited by John J. Collins, Pieter G. R. de Villiers and Adela Yarbro Collins. Religious Experience From Antiquity to the Middle Ages 7, eds. David Aune, Jan Bremmer, John J. Collins, Dyan Elliott, Amy Hollywood, Sarah Iles Johnston, Gabor Klaniczay, Paulo Nogueira, Christopher Rowland and Elliot R. Wolfson, 81-101. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, 2018.

Hurlbut, Jesse. E-mail message to Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, February 17a, 2020.

Knibb, Michael A. “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah.” In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. Vol. 2, 143-76. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1983.

Kulik, Alexander. Retroverting Slavonic Pseudepigrapha: Toward the Original of the Apocalypse of Abraham. Text-Critical Studies 3, ed. James R. Adair, Jr. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004.

———. “Slavonic apocrypha and Slavic linguistics.” In The Old Testament Apocrypha in the Slavonic Tradition: Continuity and Diversity, edited by Christfried Böttrich, Lorenzo DiTommaso and Marina Swoboda Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, 245-70. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2011. https://www.scribd.com/document/124601634/Article-Slavonic-Apocrypha-and-Slavic-Linguistics-1. (accessed December 3, 2019).

———. “Apocalypse of Abraham.” In Outside the Bible: Ancient Jewish Writings Related to Scripture, edited by Louis H. Feldman, James L. Kugel and Lawrence H. Schiffman. 3 vols. Vol. 2, 1453-81. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 2013.

Ludlow, Jared W. “Abraham’s visions of the heavens.” In Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant, edited by John Gee and Brian M. Hauglid. Studies in the Book of Abraham 3, 57-73. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), Brigham Young University, 2005. http://farms.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=164. (accessed October 10).

Malan, Solomon Caesar, ed. The Book of Adam and Eve: Also Called The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan: A Book of the Early Eastern Church. Translated from the Ethiopic, with Notes from the Kufale, Talmud, Midrashim, and Other Eastern Works. London, England: Williams and Norgate, 1882. Reprint, San Diego, CA: The Book Tree, 2005.

Mayerhofer, Kerstin. “‘And they will rejoice over me forever!’ The history of Israel in the light of the catastrophe of 70 C.E. in the Slavonic Apocalypse of Abraham.” Judaica Olomoucensia 1-2 (2014): 10-35. https://judaistika.upol.cz/fileadmin/userdata/FF/katedry/jud/judaica/Judaica_Olomucensia_2014_1-2.pdf. (accessed December 3, 2019).

Neusner, Jacob, ed. The Mishnah: A New Translation. London, England: Yale University Press, 1988.

Nibley, Hugh W. “To open the last dispensation: Moses chapter 1.” In Nibley on the Timely and the Timeless: Classic Essays of Hugh W. Nibley, edited by Truman G. Madsen, 1-20. Provo, UT: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1978. http://farms.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/?id=71. (accessed October 10).

Novickij (Novitskii, Novitsky), P. P., ed. Откровение Авраама (Otkrovenīe Avraama [Apocalypse of Abraham]) (Facsimile edition of Silʹvestrovskiĭ sbornik [Codex Sylvester]). Reproduced from RGADA (Russian State Archive of Early Acts, formerly TsGADA SSSR = Central State Archive of Early Acts), folder 381, Printer’s Library, no. 53, folios 164v-186. Общество любителей древней письменности (Obščestvo Li︠u︡biteleĭ Drevneĭ Pis’mennosti [Society of Lovers of Ancient Literature]), Izdaniia (Editions) series, (= OLDP edition, 99:2). St. Petersburg, Russia: Tipo-Lit. A. F. Markova, 1891. Reprint, Leningrad, Russia, 1967. http://www.marquette.edu/maqom/spart1.pdf, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo.31924028567927&view=1up&seq=1. (accessed December 3, 2019).

Paulsen-Reed, Amy Elizabeth. The Origins of the Apocalypse of Abraham (Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Theology in the subject of the Hebrew Bible). Harvard Divinity School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2016. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:27194248. (accessed August 4, 2019).

Rowland, Christopher. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. New York City, NY: Crossroad Publishing, 1982.

Rubinkiewicz, Ryszard. “Apocalypse of Abraham.” In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. Vol. 1, 681-705. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1983.

———. L’Apocalypse d’Abraham en vieux slave : Introduction, texte critique, traduction et commentaire. Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolikiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, Zrodlai i monografie 129. Lublin, Poland: Société des Lettres et des Sciences de l’Université Catholique de Lublin, 1987.

Scholem, Gershom, ed. 1941. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. New York City, NY: Schocken Books, 1995.

Wintermute, O. S. “Jubilees.” In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth. Vol. 2, 35-142. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1983.

Notes on Figures

Figure 1. Translation of caption: “Abraham bowing with an angel before the throne of God in the heavens.” Cf. A. Kulik, Retroverting, 18:3, p. 24.

Photographs of the originals of the illustrations are from Otkrovenie Avraama (Apocalypse of Abraham or ApAb), which comprises pages 328-375 of the Codex Sylvester. The Codex Sylvester, “the oldest and the only independent manuscript containing the full text of ApAb” (A. Kulik, Retroverting, p. 3), is known to scholars as manuscript “S.” It is the only illustrated manuscript of ApAb. Photographs of the illustrations from the original manuscript are published in this article for the first time with the kind permission of the Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi arkhiv drevnikh aktov (RGADA — Russian State Archive of Early Acts, formerly TsGADA SSSR = Central State Archive of Early Acts) in Moscow. We express our sincere gratitude to Evgeniy Rychalovskiy, Head of the Publication Department and Vladislav Rzheutsky of the German Historical Institute in Moscow, for their assistance on 4 and 6 December 2019. Within the RGADA collection, the Codex Sylvester is catalogued as folder 381, Printer’s Library, no. 53, folios 164v-186. The six illustrations can be found in these folios: 182v, 174, 172v, 170v, 168b v, and 168a.

Photographs of the illustrations from a rare printed copy of the first facsimile edition (1891) were taken on 26 April 2009 and are © Stephen T. Whitlock and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw. We express our special thanks to Carole Menzies and Jennifer Griffiths who facilitated our access to the facsimiles for filming purposes in the Taylor Bodleian Slavonic and Modern Greek Library, Oxford University, Oxford, England. The facsimile edition was originally published as N. Novickij (Novitskii, P. P., Otkrovenie Avraama and later as a reprint. Whitlock’s Image IDs are as follows: ApAb-OX10, ApAb-OX19, ApAb-OX20, ApAb-OX26, ApAb-OX30, ApAb-OX33, ApAb-OX50. For this article, the photos have been enhanced digitally for readability and size consistency, and a colored mask has been added to the backgrounds of all photos except ApAb-OX10.

Figure 2. Copyright Jeffrey M. Bradshaw.

Footnotes

 

1 A. Kulik, Retroverting, 16:3, p. 22, emphasis added.

2 Jesse Hurlbut, a specialist of illustrated medieval manuscripts gives his views on the discrepancy between the text and illustration as follows (J. Hurlbut, February 17a 2020; ibid.):

As for contradictions, it is not uncommon for medieval illustrations to differ from the texts they represent. The scribes almost never did their own illustrations, and the communication between scribes and illuminators wasn’t always successful, especially in cases where the illuminator could not (or did not) read the text. …

I’ve also had another thought about your illumination of the face-to-face encounter with God/Christ. It may be that the veil is pulled back for the benefit of the viewer–but not for Abraham. This was a frequent convention in 14th-15th-century illuminations. Here’s an example from one of the Bibles Moralisées that shows Zacharias (father of John the Baptist) serving in the temple. The walls are stripped away so we can see what’s going on, but the other present observers (“multitude de peuples“) are certainly not able to see him. Similarly, I think the artist has exposed God’s face to the reader in the ApAb, even though He remains concealed to Abraham.

3 M. Barker, Christmas, pp. 14-15.

4 Numbers 6:24-26.

5 Matthew 5:8.

6 Revelation 4:2.

7 Moses 1:31.

8 See A. Kulik, Slavonic Apocrypha and Slavic Linguistics, p. 263.

9 Ibid., p. 263. Cf. J. W. Ludlow, Visions, p. 63 and n. 20.

10 A. Kulik, Slavonic Apocrypha and Slavic Linguistics, p. 264.

11 J. Neusner, Mishnah, 3:15 I A, p. 680. See also the discussion of the views of Paulsen-Reed on ApAb’s “compatibilism,” in contrast to previous views of its “determinism,” in Essay #34.

12 E.g., Proverbs 8:22-30.

13 Job 28; 1 Corinthians 2:7-10; Alma 12:9-11; Doctrine and Covenants 76:7, 10; 84:19; 107:18-19. See also J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, Excursus 53: Comparative Explorations of the Mysteries, p. 663.

14 1 Nephi 9:5. See also e.g., 1 Nephi 3:19; 5:22; 19:3; Words of Mormon 1:7; Alma 37:12, 14, 18. The term “wisdom” recurs once in the Book of Moses, in an exposition on the gifts of the Comforter (Moses 6:61). See J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, Commentary 4:11-a, b, c, p. 253, 4:12-c, p. 255, and Excursus 2: Ancient Concepts of Wisdom, p. 516.

15 From the text of manuscript K. See R. Rubinkiewicz, Apocalypse of Abraham, p. 697 n. c.

16 Ibid., 17:5, p. 697.

17 Adela Yarbro Collins explains her view of the relationship between God the Father, Christ, and the angels in the writings of Paul as follows (A. Y. Collins, Paul, Jewish Mysticism, p. 94):

In the prose poem or hymn of Philippian [2:6], Paul portrays the pre-existent Christ as being “in the form of God.” This phrase does not refer to being God or being divine in the fullest sense. Otherwise, the “hyper-exaltation” after his death on the cross would lose its rhetorical force (Philippians 2:9). Thus “being in the form of God” is best understood as being a heavenly being, probably some sort of angel. The hyper-exalted state of Christ, historically interpreted, is best thought of as being the principal angel. The principal angel in some ancient Jewish texts is the angel who bears the name of God, such as Yahoel in the Apocalypse of Abraham, and is closest to and most like God. That the pre-existent Christ, who became the earthly Jesus, was transformed and became the highest angel is analogous to the transformation of the human Enoch into the exalted angel Metatron, whom God gives the name “The lesser YHWH” (P. S. Alexander, 3 Enoch, 12:5, p. 265). Thus, when the bodies of Paul and the members of his communities are “conformed to his glorious body” (Philippians 3:21) they will become like those of the angels.

Curiously, however, the Christian illustrator of ApAb represents Christ, sitting on the throne of God, separately from Yaho’el, the angelic companion of Abraham, whereas the earliest Christians might have more easily seen a fusion of Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament, and Jesus Christ, His earthly manifestation (e.g., M. Barker, Angel).

18 A. Kulik, Retroverting, 10:17, p. 18. The figure may also represent Metatron, whose name, according to one interpretation, is short for the Greek Metathronios, i.e., “he who stands beside the (God’s) throne,’ or ‘who occupies the throne next to the divine throne” (G. Scholem, Trends, p. 69), or perhaps Metaturannos, “the one next to the ruler” (P. S. Alexander, 3 Enoch, p. 243). “Metatron was merged with two other heavenly figures, (1) the archangel Yaho’el (ibid., 1:4, p. 257, 48D:1(1), p. 313), and (2) translated Enoch … From other texts, however, we know of an angel Yaho’el quite independent of Metatron (e.g., A. Kulik, Retroverting, 10, pp. 17-18)” (P. S. Alexander, 3 Enoch, p. 244).

Christopher Rowland speculated that Yaho’el, “like Wisdom (Wisdom 9:4) was the companion of God’s throne. While there is no explicit evidence that [Yaho’el] was the one whose seat was on the throne of God, it is not impossible that we have a theological description here which reflects that found in Ezekiel 1 and 8, where the human figure on the throne leaves the throne to function as the agent of divine will” (C. Rowland, Open Heaven, p. 103).

Other, more distant possibilities for the identity of this figure might include the “angel of the Holy Ghost” (mentioned in M. A. Knibb, Isaiah, 11:33, p. 176) or the Father, with Christ serving as his Face, in front, and the more invisible/formless Father behind.

19 For a description of the terms used to describe the different levels represented by the veils, see A. Kulik, Apocalypse of Abraham, p. 1480 n. 46.

20 Significantly, the veil in Israelite temples was woven with different colors, as described by Barker (M. Barker, Angels, p. 14. Cf. M. Barker, Gate, pp. 108-111; M. Barker, Hidden, pp. 18-19.):

The veil marked the division between the visible and the invisible creation. It represented matter, and was woven from red, blue, purple, and white threads, to represent the four elements from which the material world was made: earth (white), air (blue), fire (red), and water (purple). It was embroidered with cherubim, the winged heavenly beings found throughout the temple — in the Holy of Holies, on the walls of the great hall, and on the veil between them. They could move between the two states of creation, and transmitted heavenly knowledge to earth.

21 Moses chapters 2–4. Other ancient writings affirm what the book of Moses says about how the stories of the Creation and the Fall were revealed in vision. For example, the book of Jubilees prefaces a recital of the Creation and other events of Genesis with the Lord’s instructions to Moses to record what he would see in vision (O. S. Wintermute, Jubilees, 2:26, p. 54).

22 D&C 130:9.

23 A. Kulik, Retroverting, 19:1, 4-5, 9, pp. 24-25; cf. Abraham 3:1–18.

24 I.e., formerly shadowed, sketched, outlined, prefigured (R. Rubinkiewicz, Apocalypse of Abraham, p. 699 n. 21a). A. Kulik, Retroverting, 21:1, p. 26 translates this phrase as “the creation which was previously covered over.”

25 Cf. Abraham 5:3–5.

26 Cf. Abraham 3:22–23. See the discussion of this passage earlier in this article.

27 A. Kulik, Retroverting, pp. 26-28. Whereas R. Rubinkiewicz, L’Apocalypse d’Abraham, p. 177 n. 5 sees ApAb 23:4-10 as an insertion by a Bogomil editor, this idea is refuted in the more recent analysis of A. E. Paulsen-Reed, Origins, pp. 122-124.

Consistent with the emphasis in the first part of ApAb, which condemns idolatry through the story of Terah, the ApAb version of the Fall supposes that Adam, Eve, and Cain also practiced idolatry. Mayerhofer further explains the point of these illustrations for the protagonist of ApAb: “Abraham, who manages to stand up against his father’s ungodly practices, can escape both the crisis and the punishment” (K. Mayerhofer, And They Will Rejoice, p. 15). See also the discussion of idolatry in A. E. Paulsen-Reed, Origins, pp. 108-117.

28 J. W. Ludlow, Visions, p. 64 sees a parallel in ApAb 19:9, “and [Abraham saw] the orders they [the hosts of stars] were commanded to carry out, and the elements of earth obeying them” (R. Rubinkiewicz, L’Apocalypse d’Abraham, 19:9, p. 167) as echoing “the idea found in the Book of Abraham that greater stars had power or governed over lesser stars (see Abraham 3:2-6; 4:14-17).” The idea that the stars could be commanded to carry out God’s orders also corresponds to Abraham 4:18: “And the Gods watched those things which they had ordered until they obeyed.”

29 H. W. Nibley, To Open, p. 15. Nibley also cites extensive parallels between Moses 1 and S. C. Malan, Adam and Eve.